Advertisement

Should orthopedic surgeons consider reducing the negative effects of Outerbridge grade 2 patellofemoral chondral lesion on early postoperative recovery during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

  • Hakan Sofu
  • Yalkin Camurcu
  • Ahmet Issin
  • Hanifi Ucpunar
  • Seckin Ozcan
  • Serda Duman
Original Article • KNEE - ARTHROPLASTY
  • 30 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to comparatively evaluate the effectiveness of intra-articular PRP and HA injections applied as the treatment of Outerbridge grade 2 chondral lesions in patellofemoral joint during arthroscopic ACL reconstruction.

Methods

The clinical and radiographic data of 61 patients between 18 and 45 years of age were evaluated. The patients were separated into three groups. Hyaluronic acid injection was applied in 22 knees (Group 1), PRP injection was applied in 18 knees (Group 2), and 21 knees did not have any specific treatment except ACL reconstruction (Group 3). All patients were followed clinically at least for 12 months. Clinical examination of the operated knee, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Lysholm knee score, and Tegner activity scale were the outcome measures. Routine X-ray and MRI were also performed for all patients at 12-month postoperative follow-up visit.

Results

Although the mean VAS and Lysholm scores at 3-month follow-up were better in Group 1 and 2 than Group 3, the efficacy of intra-articular PRP on healing process regarding progression of the mean VAS and Lysholm scores through 6- and 12-month follow-ups was significantly better and longer than HA. No statistically significant differences were detected according to Tegner activity scale between the groups at 3 and 6 months; however, Group 2 had better activity level than both Group 1 (p < 0.001) and 3 (p < 0.001) at the end of 12 months after surgery.

Conclusion

Intra-articular PRP injection applied as the treatment of concomitant Outerbridge grade 2 chondral lesion in patellofemoral joint during ACL reconstruction revealed better and durable clinical outcomes via decreasing the potentially negative effects of chondral pathology on postoperative healing with respect to HA injection.

Level of evidence

III—retrospective comparative study.

Keywords

Anterior cruciate ligament Cartilage Patellofemoral joint 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study has been approved by the institutional review board.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Arnoczky SP, Sheibani-Rad S (2013) The basic science of platelet-rich plasma (PRP): what clinicians need to know. Sports Med Arthrosc 21(4):180–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berta A, Duska Z, Toth F, Hangody L (2015) Clinical experiences with cartilage repair techniques: outcomes, indications, contraindications and rehabilitation. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 26(2):84–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Campbell KA, Saltzman BM, Mascarenhas R, Khair MM, Verma NN, Bach BR, Cole BJ (2015) Does intra-articular platelet rich plasma provide clinically superior outcomes compared with other therapies in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses. Arthroscopy 31(11):2213–2221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cole BJ, Karas V, Hussey K, Pilz K, Fortier LA (2017) Hyaluronic acid versus platelet-rich plasma: a prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing clinical outcomes and effects on intra-articular biology for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med 45(2):339–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cox CL, Huston LJ, Dunn WR et al (2014) Are articular cartilage lesions and meniscus tears predictive of IKDC, KOOS, and Marx activity level outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A 6-year multicenter cohort study. Am J Sports Med 42(5):1058–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Culvenor AG, Cook JL, Collins NJ, Crossley KM (2013) Is patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis an under-recognised outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A narrative literature review. Br J Sports Med 47(2):66–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Di Matteo B, Filardo G, Kon E, Marcacci M (2015) Platelet-rich plasma: evidence for the treatment of patellar and Achilles tendinopathy—a systematic review. Musculoskelet Surg 99(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gao B, Cordova ML, Zheng N (2012) Three-dimensional joint kinematics of ACL-deficient and ACL-reconstructed knees during stair ascent and descent. Hum Mov Sci 31(1):222–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kato Y, Maeyama A, Lertwanich P et al (2013) Biomechanical comparison of different graft positions for single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(4):816–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim HS, Seon JK, Jo AR (2013) Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Relat Res 25:165–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kon E, Mandebaum B, Buda R, Filardo G, Delcogliano M, Timoncini A, Fornasari PM, Giannini S, Marcacci M (2011) Platelet-rich plasma intra-articular injection versus hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation as treatments for cartilage pathology: from early degeneration to osteoarthritis. Arthroscopy 27(10):1490–1501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Madry H, Kohn D, Cucchiarini M (2013) Direct FGF-2 gene transfer via recombinant adeno-associated virus vectors stimulates cell proliferation, collagen production, and the repair of experimental lesions in the human ACL. Am J Sports Med 41:194–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marlovits S, Singer P, Zeller P, Mandl I, Haller J, Trattnig S (2006) Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) for the evaluation of autologous chondrocyte transplantation: determination of interobserver variability and correlation to clinical outcome after 2 years. Eur J Radiol 57:16–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mascarenhas R, Cvetanovich GL, Sayegh ET, Verma NN, Cole BJ, Bush-Joseph C, Bach BR Jr (2015) Does double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction improve postoperative knee stability compared with single-bundle techniques? A systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses. Arthroscopy 31(6):1185–1196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oussedik S, Tsitskaris K, Parker D (2015) Treatment of articular cartilage lesions of the knee by microfracture or autologous chondrocyte implantation: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 31(4):732–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Panseri S, Russo A, Cunha C, Bondi A, Di Martino A, Patella S, Kon E (2012) Osteochondral tissue engineering approaches for articular cartilage and subchondral bone regeneration. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(6):1182–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Risberg MA, Grindem H, Øiestad BE (2016) We need to implement current evidence in early rehabilitation programs to improve long-term outcome after anterior cruciate ligament injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 46(9):710–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robin BN, Jani SS, Marvil SC, Reid JB, Schillhammer CK, Lubowitz JH (2015) Advantages and disadvantages of transtibial anteromedial portal, and outside-in femoral tunnel drilling in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 31(7):1412–1417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Røtterud JH, Risberg MA, Engebretsen L, Arøen A (2012) Patients with focal full-thickness cartilage lesions benefit less from ACL reconstruction at 2-5 years follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(8):1533–1539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Røtterud JH, Sivertsen EA, Forssblad M, Engebretsen L, Arøen A (2013) Effect of meniscal and focal cartilage lesions on patient-reported outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a nationwide cohort study from Norway and Sweden of 8476 patients with 2-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 41(3):535–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sermer C, Devitt B, Chahal J, Kandel R, Theodoropoulos J (2015) The addition of platelet-rich plasma to scaffolds used for cartilage repair: a review of human and animal studies. Arthroscopy 31(8):1607–1625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sofu H, Kockara N, Oner A, Camurcu Y, Issın A, Sahin V (2017) Results of hyaluronic acid-based cell-free scaffold application in combination with microfracture for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the knee: 2-year comparative study. Arthroscopy 33(1):209–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sofu H, Yildirim T, Gürsu S, Issin A, Şahin V (2015) Short-term effects of partial meniscectomy on the clinical results of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(1):184–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Takeda K, Hasegawa T, Kiriyama Y, Matsumoto H, Otani T, Toyama Y, Nagura T (2014) Kinematic motion of the anterior cruciate ligament deficient knee during functionally high and low demanding tasks. J Biomech 47(10):2526–2530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vaishya R, Pandit R, Agarwal AK, Vijay V (2017) Intra-articular hyaluronic acid is superior to steroids in knee osteoarthritis: a comparative, randomized study. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 8(1):85–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vavken P, Fleming BC, Mastrangelo AN, Machan JT, Murray MM (2012) Biomechanical outcomes after bioenhanced anterior cruciate ligament repair and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction are equal in a porcine model. Arthroscopy 28:672–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hakan Sofu
    • 1
  • Yalkin Camurcu
    • 2
  • Ahmet Issin
    • 2
  • Hanifi Ucpunar
    • 2
  • Seckin Ozcan
    • 2
  • Serda Duman
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Bahcelievler Medicalpark HospitalIstinye UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Erzincan University Faculty of MedicineErzincanTurkey
  3. 3.Diyarbakir Selahaddin Eyyubi State HospitalDiyarbakirTurkey

Personalised recommendations